2.26.2016

The Republican process of picking Clinton's opponent already has, before the fourth delegate selection event, pruned the field from 17 to five, with only four — Trump, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and John Kasich, but not Ben Carson — with arguable paths to the nomination. Cruz is counting on volunteers wielding smartphones loaded with analytics — Boss Tweed meets Steve Jobs — to counter Trump's surfing on an endless wave of free media. Rubio needs Kasich, the only remaining governor, to wither while waiting for the process to reach states thought to be congenial.

Suddenly, there are three strands of Republicanism, each entrenched and vying for supremacy in 2016. Ted Cruz is the leader of the traditional conservative purists. Marco Rubio is emerging from the mud of a multicandidate brawl to lead the once-dominant, now diminished, mainstream lane of the GOP.
But it is Trump’s new alliance of angry populists that is ascendant — and on the precipice of dominance.

Built on the backs of working-class men and women who feel abandoned, economically and culturally, Trump’s coalition has both brought in new voters and carved out support from the other two. Trump won over evangelicals from Cruz in South Carolina, and even more resoundingly again in Nevada. He then took moderates from the mainstream in New Hampshire and Nevada en route to landslide victories in three consecutive states.

“What Trump is consolidating is the people who are unhappy being in either camp — those who don’t see themselves as conservative insurgents or as mainstream Republicans,” said Yuval Levin, an influential Republican thinker and editor of the quarterly conservative journal National Affairs. “They’re insurgents but they’re not conservatives. And they’re not happy with the system that gave us that binary choice.”
“It’s kind of Archie Bunker types,” said Glen Bolger, a veteran Republican pollster who is unaligned in 2016 but opposed to Trump

I will never vote for Donald Trump, not even if he’s the Republican nominee.

I will never vote for Donald Trump, not even if Ronald Reagan and William F. Buckley rise from the grave and beg me to support him.

I will never vote for Donald Trump, not even if it means he forms a third party and runs as the narcissist sociopath he truly is.

I will never vote for Donald Trump, no matter how many times the liberal media declares his inevitability and his immunity to scrutiny and attack or how many times the “conservative” media ignores his record and beliefs to fellate him on-air.

I will never vote for Donald Trump because he’s a pro-gun control, pro-single-payer health care, pro-eminent domain, pro-abortion, and pro-statism liberal who will immediately revert to form when he’s finished selling his fauxservatism to people he patently views as rubes.

I will never vote for Donald Trump, because absolutely nothing he can say or do will cover the fact he is obviously and blatantly lying every time his thin lips move and his freakishly tiny hands pound the podium.

I will never vote for Donald Trump because it’s utterly obvious that he lacks the temperament, judgment, and basic sanity to be placed as steward over 7,700 nuclear weapons and the rest of the awesome power of the United States military.

I will never vote for Donald Trump because he’s a draft-dodging blowhard who was chasing strange in Midtown when John McCain was having his arms broken by the Vietnamese.

I will never vote for Donald Trump to toe the “he’s my nominee” line because if he wins my party’s nomination it means the GOP has sold itself to a soulless, utterly unprincipled liberal narcissist bent on its destruction and that of conservatism.

I will never vote for Donald Trump, because it would require the complete abdication of every political value that informs my life; a reverence for the Constitution and the Republic and for limited-government conservative principles that shaped this nation and that continue to represent the only viable opposition to the galloping growth of the state.

I will never vote for Donald Trump because the solution to a Washington’s crony capitalism problems isn’t to elect an even more egregious and lavishly corrupt crony capitalist.

Since religious language has again infected this unpredictable and turbulent political season, here is a verse that could describe the followers of Donald Trump. It is found in Paul’s second letter to his protege Timothy (or as Trump might call it, Two Timothy): "For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear."

All politicians tell voters what they want to hear. It is one reason for the anger many voters feel for members of both political parties. These voters believe Washington has let them down, promising things it has not, or cannot, deliver in exchange for their support.

Trump makes grandiose promises and claims he never backs up with facts.
...
To followers of Trump it doesn't matter. Inaccuracies and the unlikelihood of making good on his promises are not as important as the thought behind them. This can be dangerous in a leader who aspires to power.

Writing in the Harvard Business Review in 2012, Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic, the CEO of Hogan Assessment Systems, a professor of Business Psychology at University College London and a faculty member at Columbia University, warns about "The Dark Side of Charisma."
Noting "the short-term benefits of charisma are often neutralized by its long-term consequences,"

Chamorro-Premuzic lists four reasons for resisting charisma: "Charisma often dilutes judgment," it is "addictive," it "disguises psychopaths" and it "fosters collective narcissism."
Despite the dangers, he says, "the dark side of charm is often overlooked."

Before the rise of Trump, one could point to President Obama as a recent example of the phenomenon.
"In the era of multimedia politics," notes Chamorro-Premuzic, "leadership is commonly downgraded to just another form of entertainment and charisma is indispensable for keeping the audience engaged."

A characteristic of Trump's followers appears to be their determination to ignore any evidence that would challenge their faith. And so when I question the reality show-style of Trump, I get messages on social media calling me a "sack of (excrement)," a member of the "establishment" and "old," which is the unkindest cut of all.

Remember when age used to go with wisdom, unless proven otherwise? If you're a millennial reading this, perhaps you have no memory of such a time.
Trump may well win the Republican nomination and even the presidency. If he does, it will confirm that the transformation of American politics -- from serious business, to another form of entertainment -- is complete and the White House will become the biggest reality show of them all.

15 comments:

JP, I love you, man. But I am deeply saddened by the complete lack of discernment on the part of people like you and people at SI who actually would vote for Cruz or Rubio above Trump. I really don't know if Trump is for real or not. He may be a complete fraud who will not live up to his campaigning once in office, or he may be a political tool used to divert the votes, just like Perot was. In any event, Trump, or the image that is being portrayed as what he stands for, is better than any other choice out there. It's embarrassing and sad going to places like this and SI where the constituents are in love with globalists who will do nothing but push us further down that road. At least one candidate appears to be different. Again, whether or not he actually is, who knows? Should I start calling you and all the people at SI "comrade," since you appear to be so in love with globalism (which is slang for global Socialism, which eventually morphs into Communism) and want to expand it as quickly as possible?

JP, I admit that I could be a complete sucker who is falling for it. Trump may be just another globalist shill like all of the other candidates. Since I am conservative, I choose to endorse a candidate who ac least appears to be different. Why vote for obvious globalist shills who don't even pretend to be different?

I'm with Jim here. Trump has established his pattern of using and abusing business associates, local government leaders, investors, wives, and girlfriends. Exactly why would it be different if he moved to Washington DC?

Put gently, if we get four years of Trump, we'll all be thinking Juanita Broadrick and Paula Jones didn't have it so bad.

Here's another way of putting it, anon: Trump's historical positions are pretty much identical with Hilliary's, and he discussed his possible candidacy with Bill Clinton before filing. Do the math, my friend. Looks a lot like a trick by a Bubba who is not me.

One final thought; regarding globalism, I would agree, even apart from going into Birch Society-style paranoia, that there is an issue with our country's deference to the United Nations and such. But for a solution to those problems, I want to see someone who has consistently pointed to a way out of the situation, not a guy who has consistently taken advantage of it.

So even if I accept your premiss--and to an extent I do--I cannot accept your solution. It simply doesn't make sense.

Just off the top of my head, Trump says he is against Common Core. Again, is this true? I have no idea if he means it or is just saying it. Common Core is essentially a purposeful misguiding and brainwashing of youth to train them to be global serfs of the global state. Many of the other candidates not only perhaps waffle on the issue, some of them outright endorse it and are not ashamed of doing so. Again, even if he is a charade, I'm voting for the guy who had the audacity to firmly stand against it. This is just one issue I picked at random. There are many others where I could say that Trump is the only one who is standing up for the constitution and freedom and basic common sense. Again, maybe I'm the sucker buying right into it, but I'd rather vote for the guy who is at least saying something different rather than the people who wholeheartedly embrace, with gusto, just the opposite.

I can see your point about "abusing" some associates, but being gruff and "abusive" is not the same as people who seem to end up dead with other candidates. Anyone who dismisses that as mere "conspiracy theory" I believe shows they really do not have a clue and are maybe even willfully ignorant, seeing as there is so much documentation of nefarious dealings, from all political persuasions.

Cruz, Rubio, and Carson all have better credentials on Common Core than do Trump, friend. And Trump's abusiveness includes defaulting on loans, setting up corporate structures so investors take the hit (just not himself), adultery, and abandonment. Pretty big stuff, and the only person who ranks up with him in this regard is Hilliary--who polls say would beat him in a general election.

Mr. Bubba, anyone who does not come out like Trump and stand outright against Common Core is a sell out. If they are not a sell out, then they are woefully naive.

Your comment shows you are a supporter of Common Core. In all seriousness, I find it hard to have a serious conversation with anyone who actually thinks Common Core is actually a good thing. It baffles my mind how anyone can be for such brainwashing.

I have enjoyed your comments on this blog, and I'm sure you're a nice guy, just like I'm sure JP is. Maybe this is just a hint for me to only talk on this blog about sports, the weather, etc. You guys are far too liberal for me and I can see we would have a hard time getting anywhere trying to have a conversation about politics.

?? No, I'd end the Department of Education completely. My take is simply that others--all of the others in the GOP race--have better credentials than does "The Combover" in this regard. The HSLDA has been documenting this.

I would be for that as well. The only problem is, it's not going to happen. That's almost like saying, "We have decided to send a manned spaceship to Mars. It launches today and will arrive tomorrow." It's completely out of the realm of possibility to get rid of the DOE. Although, one reasonable and powerful way a person can make a stand, and not be treated as a luicrous joke, is to be against Common Core, which Trump has done. This is just one example out of many where I think he is the only one who stands close to constitutional values and stands up for America. Is he right on everything? Of course not! No one is! So no, I don't fawn all over the guy, but it's so blatantly obvious that he's the one who comes the closest to sticking up for America and for the constitution that the other candidates aren't even in the ballgame. It just saddens me that Christians are so duped and brainwashed by FOX news that they are jumping on the bandwagon to be against him. At least there are some who are not being fooled by FOX, but many are.

Trump is historically against the 2nd Amendment, for abortion, for corporate welfare, against enforcing immigration laws (see Powerline's bit on Trump Towers--it's hideous), abuses banktruptcy laws....I'm sorry, you need to see through Trump. He is a liberal Democrat.

Mr. Bubba, you may be right. I do not know if this switch in views to conservative ones are true, or if this is an act. The main reason I am voting for him is because he at least portrays to be the only true conservative, constitutional-following candidate out there. I'd rather vote for the candidate who at least pretends to believe in the constitution than the ones you know are just shills. In any event, all of these guys are just mid-level management anyway. The true power is usually hidden and behind the scenes.

Since most of you seem to be fans of Cruz, I listened to his campaign ad and I've got to be honest, I'm not sure that this guy makes a ton of sense. What he says seems a bit "off." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v75wCTMZoSY